Effect of model compounds on stress relaxation in asphalt binders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recycled asphalt, enriched with asphaltene, wax, and oil modifiers that function as warm mix asphalt additives or rejuvenators, is increasingly utilized in asphalt pavement construction. However, the impact of incorporating these compounds on the stress relaxation behavior, a key factor closely associated with the cracking resistance of asphalt binder, remains largely unexplored. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the effects of wax, asphaltene, and re-refined engine oil bottom (REOB) additives on the stress relaxation response of bituminous binders under different cooling rates and aging conditions. Key findings indicate that wax accelerates thermal stress relaxation, with aging and cooling rates significantly affecting the asphalt’s behavior; asphaltene shows varied structuring effects based on dosage and cooling rate, particularly notable at a 4 % dosage under slow cooling; and REOB additives exhibit pronounced sensitivity to cooling methods, with differences becoming less evident after aging or at higher dosages. Additionally, the interaction between wax and asphaltene within the binder matrix suggests that wax’s influence is dominant at lower asphaltene levels, whereas high asphaltene content predominantly dictates the binder’s stress relaxation performance, minimally influenced by cooling methods. These insights reveal the complex interactions between binder components and external conditions, providing guidance for optimizing asphalt binder formulations for enhanced cracking resistance. • Wax accelerates stress relaxation in asphalt binders. • Asphaltene increases relaxation modulus significantly at 4 % dosage and slow cooling. • REOB additives show marked sensitivity to cooling methods, less so after aging. • High asphaltene content primarily influences stress relaxation, overriding wax effects.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".